Heart Rate and Human Performance


Dec 11, 2012 (6 years and 2 months ago)


EE 400
/546: Biological Frameworks for Engineers

Handed out on 2
06; due on 2


“Great Moments in Biology”

Article #3

(required for graduate students enrolled in EE 546; optional for everyone else)


Read "Discovery and directed evolution of a glyphosate tolerance gene" (L. A. Castle et al.,

: 1151
4, 2004)
using the attached Study Guide. To get this article, go to Pub Med
(www.pubmed.gov), enter search terms (e.g., to find articles by L. A. Castle published in 2004, enter
"Castle LA 2004"), follow the link to the appropriate abstract, follow the link to the

Science website, and
select "Full Text (PDF)" to get the article in PDF format. You may need to follow these links from a UW
computer in order to take advantage of the UW’s subscription to the online version of

Then participate in a discussion
of this article from 12:30 to 1:20 PM on Tuesday, February 14th
in Room M406 of the Electrical Engineering building. Be prepared to discuss the questions posed by the
Study Guide, and bring any additional questions you have about the article.


General background

• This class has given you a basic understanding of genetic engineering. Often, genetic
engineering simply involves transferring a gene into an organism that didn’t previously have it; however,
we sometimes want to create a new gene

that codes for a new protein whose function is better or different
than that of any naturally occurring protein. This paper is an excellent example of creating new genes by
the process of “directed evolution.”

Paragraph 1 (Abstract)

• The first two s
entences hit you with some vocabulary right away; refer to Scheme 1. Glyphosate
is the molecule on top. Adding an acetyl group (H
C=O) to the N atom of this molecule is called N
acetylation and is catalyzed by the enzyme glyphosate N
acetyltransferase (
GAT), forming the product N

Transgenic organisms

are those that have received new genes (in this case, a gene for GAT).

• What is “DNA shuffling”? This paragraph doesn’t tell us, so we’ll have to look for an
explanation in the rest of

the article.

• Since this article is about tolerance of an herbicide, it’s not surprising that the researchers
studied tobacco and maize (corn).
E. coli
(a bacterium) and

(a simple, non
agricultural plant)
were also used because they are mod
el organisms in which genetic manipulations are relatively easy.

• “Glyphosate acetylation provides an alternative strategy for supporting glyphosate use on
crops.” What is this an alternative to? See the next paragraph for the answer.

Paragraph 2

• H
ow does glyphosate kill weeds? How can EPSPS genes from bacteria be used to make crops
resistant to glyphosate? Might a buildup of glyphosate inside these crops lead to any problems?

Paragraph 3

• How does N
acetylglyphosate compare with glyphosate?

EE 400
/546: Biological Frameworks for Engineers

Handed out on 2
06; due on 2


aragraph 4

: obtaining food from dead or decaying organic matter.

Paragraph 5

• “We assayed recombinant E. coli expressing genomic DNA fragments from
….” In other words, they cut up the
B. licheniformis

genome into pieces a
nd then stuck the
pieces into different
E. coli

cells and determined which cells could convert glyphosate into N
acetylglyphosate. All of the cells that could do this contained a certain piece of the
B. licheniformis
genome, which must contain a gene for

Paragraph 8

• Note the explanations of k

and K
, which are important. Note that a lower K

indicates a
higher binding affinity.

Paragraphs 9

• Now we get into this business of “fragmentation
based multigene shuffling.” This technique
was d
eveloped in the lab of W. P. Stemmer (references 20 and 21; the 2

paragraph and first figure of
reference 20 cover the essence of the method). In brief, “parental” genes with similar sequences are
fragmented into pieces and then put back together somewh
at haphazardly, resulting in new genes made up
of combinations of pieces of the previous genes.

Paragraph 11

• To bring the K

below 0.5 mM, how did the researchers increase the genetic diversity of the
genes they shuffled? If you don’t remember what th
B. subtilis

B. cereus

YITI sequences are, go
back to Paragraph 7.

• In Figure 2, in going from iteration 8 to iteration 9, the lowest K

increases (A) and the highest

decreases (B), yet the highest k

ratio still increases (C). How is tha
t possible?

Paragraph 12

• “No single residue was identified that could account for the improvement. Altering the context
of the entire protein through introduction of many new residues at once resulted in a complex solution to
the problem.” What does
this indicate about the structure and function of this enzyme, and perhaps about
proteins in general?

Paragraph 13

• “…We incorporated into the eighth
iteration library additional amino acid diversity from the
more distantly related putative proteins of
. inocua

Z. mobilis
.” Again, refer back to Paragraph 7 if
necessary. Why do you think Castle et al. used related proteins rather than unrelated ones?

Paragraph 14

• In terms of amino acid sequence, how similar was the best 11
iteration enzyme to

the original
parental enzymes? How did they compare in terms of function? Is this surprising?

Paragraph 18

• What, if anything, still needs to be done before seeds containing the new GAT gene are created
in bulk and sold to farmers?